Is the Asia‐Pacific Partnership a viable alternative to Kyoto?

Aynsley Kellow

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2010, vol. 1, issue 1, 10-15

Abstract: The Kyoto Protocol has failed: horizontally because it failed to secure commitments from important players; vertically because of the lack of delivery of outcomes among those who did accede to it. The Asia‐Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate represents a useful way forward, both as a non‐treaty agreement that contains a promising non‐binding sectoral approach to minimizing emissions by seven parties accounting for more than half global emissions, and as an exercise in ‘minilateralism’ where understanding can develop among the key players. It has provided an important building block upon which to build other initiatives, such as the Major Economies Meeting of the US Bush administration and now the Major Economies Forum of the Obama administration. These arenas with 17 members offer opportunities not possible in full multilateral arenas such as Framework Convention on Climate Change, where sheer numbers simply slow processes and help produce lowest common denominator responses. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance

Date: 2010
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.15

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:wirecc:v:1:y:2010:i:1:p:10-15

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().